Plan to map out natural resources
By Indra Darmawan
JAKARTA (JP): October and November were among the busiest months in the year 2000 for the House of Representatives (DPR). Extensive sessions were held for executives and legislators to discuss and finally approve laws on the national development plan (Propenas).
The schedule was hectic largely because the annual development plan (Repeta-yearly breakdown of Propenas) and annual budget for 2001 (APBN) were also in the pipeline at almost the same time and the schedule overlapped.
In the past, the usual time allocation for this kind of activity was stretched out over a year with clear sequences and an ample schedule. All's done now.
The government officially submitted the draft of Propenas in October and began the long process of deliberation in DPR. Before it was submitted to DPR, the draft had been circulated to various parties, mostly to central ministries, regional governments, and universities, to obtain feedback. The government even staged a "road show" in selected provinces.
The draft chapter on natural resources and environmental management contained background on major issues, national policy directions, proposed development programs and a matrix of policies.
Twelve chapters in Propenas covered all development sectors such as economics, politics, law and order, regional government, religion, education, social welfare as well as natural resources development and environmental management.
Does Propenas differ from the old practice of Repelita and Sarlita during the New Order regime? Does it shed new light and hope for better planning formulation?
The government and DPR have been doing this since the beginning of the first Repelita (Five-year Development Plan) in 1969. Nevertheless, this time, the DPR is in a far better bargaining position with stronger authority and greater self- confidence, though not always smarter, compared to the government.
The discussions often came to a near deadlock especially in the smaller and intensive working group sessions. In addition, special sessions were held to lobby and seek compromise on disputed issues such as the level of BPPN's asset recovery rate.
However, the discussion on the natural resources and environmental management chapter went relatively smoothly without major revisions. Perhaps both the government and DPR were exhausted after engaging in heated discussion on earlier chapters on the national economic and political development plan, or perhaps they were not interested in this "unpopular" issue.
My observation seems to suggest that the DPR members did not have sufficient information and knowledge on the matter.
In the sub-chapter 'background of major issues', five major issues were addressed, namely:
(1) the importance of local and adat (indigenous) people in the management of natural resources;
(2) gradual transfer of authority in natural resources management to local administration;
(3) people's control, accountability, and law enforcement in natural resources management;
(4) the problems of increasing post-crisis poverty rate, combined with poor law enforcement, which have already caused destruction to the environment (i.e. illegal logging and encroachment of protected forests); and
(5) the adverse impact of excessive industrialization on environment quality.
Each issue is equally important, elaborated upon in short and concise paragraphs. One can see that these identify several problems related to the natural resources development and environmental management and are mostly concerned with the practices during the New Order era (1966-1998).
The draft confirmed the management of natural resources in the past was a short-sighted venture and focused on exploiting natural resources to gain foreign reserves to support high economic growth. This was done without adequate attention (and compensation) to the welfare of those living in and around locations of natural resources, and who were directly affected by the exploitation.
The draft also "confessed" that the exploitation of natural resources was in fact only benefiting certain people and certain groups. Indirectly, it also recommended that the government's record of achievements in natural resources and environmental management had been grim.
Based on those major issues, policy directions were spelled out clearly to deal with each problem. They contained, however, mostly similar standard actions usually found in the New Order's Repelita documents such as the importance of good practices in natural resources development in order to support sustainable development and for the sake of future generations.
The policy directions in Propenas are derived almost directly from the 1999 State Guidelines (GBHN) and must be understood in the context of national development planning documents which are always broad, rhetorical and standard in nature and designed to serve its purpose of providing guidance for a more concrete formulation of development programs, activities, and projects.
Five development programs are indicated in Propenas and structured correspondingly with the major issues explained in the earlier paragraph of the chapter.
First, the program for the development of information on natural resources and environmental management.
This includes proposed activities to improve the availability of data, the importance of proper valuation of natural resources, as well as open and easy access to the data.
This program is crucial in the light of the formal implementation of regional autonomy, starting in January 2001 when many provinces and districts will start to rely heavily on their natural resources to boost their income. To do so, they will need good and reliable information on natural resources especially for production and conservation purposes.
Second, the program for effective management, conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources to strike a sustainable balance between exploitation of natural resources for production use and protection of the environment.
This should be the priority for every provincial authority at all levels to ensure sustainable development. In fact, similar programs has been in place for quite a long time but have performed poorly.
Third, the program to prevent and control environmental damage. This includes efforts to prevent damage caused by excessive exploitation; the application of standard environment quality measures; integration of "cost to the environment" into production cost of industries; and development of traditional technology and other environmentally-friendly modes of production.
Fourth, the program for institutional development and law enforcement in natural resources management to establish a just, proper and sustainable usage of natural resources. This includes proposed activities such as: enactment of a law on natural resources management; improvement in monitoring, controlling and surveillance methods, especially in fishery and marine sectors; development of incentives and sanctions for industries which pose serious threats to the environment; developing voluntary mechanisms to promote eco-labeling and ISO-14000; as well as improving control mechanisms against bio-piracy and illegal sea fishing by foreigners.
Fifth, the program for improvement of community participation in natural resources management aimed at facilitating greater public involvement in planning, formulating, and monitoring development policy.
This includes capacity building programs for the local government officials and the community through religion, culture and adat approach; protection of adat and ulayat (traditional property) rights; protection of traditional technology; and utilization of "local wisdom" in managing natural resources.
Propenas was made during a transition period. The period of Propenas is 2000-2004, but the deliberation and approval process was delayed until the end of the year 2000. Therefore it is a supposed five-year development plan left with only four years to go.
The beginning of the fiscal year was also changed from April to January. Despite these "oddities", Propenas was written in much simpler language (and fewer pages) compared to its predecessor, Repelita. It was intended that the documents should be easy to read even for the average person.
The government no longer dominates the formulation of the national development plan but the authority is equally shared with the DPR. Strong commitment toward a just and sustainable development in natural resources has been shown in Propenas. But one big question remains. Can it be implemented? Will it enforceable?
It all looks good on paper. But why, despite continuous effort on the part of the government and with increasing expressions of public concern, does the rate of deforestation still exceed 1.45 million hectares a year?
Any day now, Propenas will be facing the difficult test in executing its role in providing general guidelines for Indonesia's development process as it embarks on the regional autonomy drive.
The writer is a post-graduate student at the Flinders University in South Australia and a staff member at Bappenas (National Development Planning Board).